/sci/ - Science & Math

[Anonymous No.10700400]

How plausible is Electric Universe Theory?

[Anonymous No.10700402]

>>10700400
100% set in stone fact

[Anonymous No.10700405]

Maybe if you could name one scientific instrument/ piece of technology that doesn't run on fucking electricity then that would be a great start on proving that the universe ISN'T electrical.

>but it's all particles

If only there were empirical evidence of such.

[Anonymous No.10700414]

>>10700405
>a mill powered by gravitational potential (like a water wheel in a glowing river)
>steam engines
>refrigeration cycles
>ballistic technology and rocketry
>gliders
>metal forming and machining
>sheet metal working techniques
>heat treatment techniques
Etc etc etc etc

[Anonymous No.10700426]

>>10700405
Particles are just how we explain fundamental electrical behavior.
I hate schools for teaching people they are little balls.

[Anonymous No.10700466]

>>10700400
>How plausible is Electric Universe Theory?
Considering the only people who defend this are intellectually dishonest schizos on /sci/ I'm inclined to dismiss it is absolute horse shit.

[Anonymous No.10700467]

>>10700405
this is why all this theories get smashed as just pseudoscience...for people like you who don't even know what they are talking about

their main argument is that the universe has a lot more electrical interaction than currently scientist think, that this interplanetary electrical action is the basis for many of the phenomena we see in the universe and they form not just because of gravity, for example the filamentary
form of many objects in the universe would be because of the "electrical nature" and not because of gravity.

[Anonymous No.10700472]

>>10700467
>interplanetary electrical action
never been observed

[Anonymous No.10700529]

>>10700414
>a mill powered by gravitational potential

Explain what gravity is and how it isn't electrical, I'll wait. No really I will wait even if it takes 300 replies and yet another archived thread of people saying "no ur wrong" without explaining why.

>steam engines
>refrigeration cycles
>ballistic technology and rocketry
>gliders
>metal forming and machining
>sheet metal working techniques
>heat treatment techniques

Which all work because we circle an electric transformer. Try doing all this when the molecules used in these processes don't have magnetism. Trying doing all this with no sun around, oh wait then you wouldn't even exist.

>>10700426
>Particles are just how we explain fundamental electrical behavior.
Right, so its bullshit and arbitrary. You're particularizing fucking electrical effects.

>I hate schools for teaching people they are little balls.
"schools" weren't the ones that came up with that psychosis, it was dumb physicists looking to simplify what they never understood to begin with. Some of them actually confuse "discharge" with "negative charge" and think that electricity flows like water down a pipe.

>>10700467
>their main argument is that the universe has a lot more electrical interaction than currently scientist think, that this interplanetary electrical action is the basis for many of the phenomena we see in the universe and they form not just because of gravity, for example the filamentary

Did you just refer to "gravity" as it's own separate modality? It's dielectric acceleration, a fucking electrical effect. This is why people "like you(me) who don't even know what they are talking about" exist, because people like you still talk about shit that has no basis in reality.

[Anonymous No.10700545]

>>10700529
>Which all work because we circle an electric transformer.
I don't see an electric transformer in the Newcomen atmospheric engine... Nor in paragliders.

[Anonymous No.10700550]

>>10700466
>Considering the only people who defend this are intellectually dishonest schizos on /sci/ I'm inclined to dismiss it is absolute horse shit.
^This. EU alternates between being retarded nonsense at worst and being painfully contorted attempts to restate what everyone already agrees on with different terminology at best.

[Anonymous No.10700560]

>>10700529

Buddy, steam engines were used before electricity was used as an energy source.

[Anonymous No.10700577]

>>10700472
>>interplanetary electrical action
>never been observed

we do observe electrical action because of the sun tho

>the sun is not "interplanetary action"

yea, yea , yea... I said interPLANETARY the sun is not a planet is a star.... ok you win

I'm not defending this theory it just cought my curiosity so I started learning about it, thats all. from what I understand they do not deny the electron as a particle, ken wheeler is the ones that does and wierdly enough the fans of both sides (electric universe - ken wheeler) got together....

btw whenever you see people posting a toroid shape thats a ken wheeler fan, a toroid its not a big part of electric universe, if you want to identify electric universe with a shape it would be "plasmoids" (figures formed by plasma disrcharges).

[Anonymous No.10700590]

>>10700545
It's called the fucking sun you dipshit. Take it away and watch the wind and pressure changes disappear. (along with your dumb sorry ass). Unless you think that an atmospheric engine works with no atmosphere, 9which would be pretty hilarious).

>>10700560
BUDDY. PAL. OLD FRIEND. COMPATRIOT. MOLECULES "MOVE" TO MAKE HEAT. WHAT CAUSES THE MOLECULES TO MOVE?
>other molecules
And what causes those molecules to stay particularized so they don't conglomerate together when they bounce off each other? Fields perhaps?
>fields
You mean like a magnetic field or something? No that would be too simple to explain in less than a paragraph, it has to be 4 separate completely unrelated forces that impel/ react with each other for no reason whatsoever.

[Anonymous No.10700599]

>>10700590
lol

[Anonymous No.10700612]

>>10700590
>WHAT CAUSES THE MOLECULES TO MOVE?
Kinetic energy.

>And what causes those molecules to stay particularized so they don't conglomerate together when they bounce off each other?
Kinetic energy. The tails of the EM field is what conglomerates the molecules, not what prevent them from conglomerating, you retard.

[Anonymous No.10700635]

>>10700612
>Kinetic energy.

Nice explanation. Want to elaborate what that is and where it comes from?

>The tails of the EM field is what conglomerates the molecules, not what prevent them from conglomerating, you retard.

How do the "tails" do this? What is a "field" and what causes a field? Good luck with that one.

[Anonymous No.10700668]

>>10700400
Never heard about it before, but looking at the diagram makes sense. Doesn't our current BB theory propose that the universe started with a hot flash something like a white hole? The death would be by consumption into a black hole and the whole thing just happens over and over again for us mere 4d mortals while the universe exists eternally in the 5th dimension.

[Anonymous No.10700677]

>>10700635
>Want to elaborate what that is and where it comes from?
Ir you are a retard that don't know what kinetic energy is, it's not my problem.

>How do the "tails" do this?
If you don't know what the Van der Waals forces are, it's not my problem.

>What is a "field"
If you don't know that, it's not my problem, retard.

[Anonymous No.10700699]

>>10700677
>energy possessed by virtue of being in motion
Well okay then. What is motion and how is it a virtue? It's like saying that I'm a completely different person when I start walking as opposed to standing still. Shit doesn't make sense, captain.

>If you don't know what the Van der Waals forces are, it's not my problem.

I fail to differentiate it from electrostatics. Apparently so does everyone else since there's a lack of an explanation other than "hurr durr at this particular distance this "force" comes into play even though we can't explain what that is". Surely you must know though, perhaps you could differentiate it from electrostatics/ "magnetic attraction"?


>If you don't know that, it's not my problem, retard.

What an elaborate an educated response. So what is a field then since you know? You can stop passing off your ignorance onto Google and Wikipedia anytime.

[Anonymous No.10700703]

>its a reddit spacing avatar fagging mass replying schizo samefag incoherently shills his tinfoil theory episode
Please go fuck yourself to death you transparent mongoloid.

[Anonymous No.10700706]

>>10700400
is this diagram supposed to be 3D or 4D
...or perhaps... 5D???

[Anonymous No.10700716]

>>10700529
rockets still work in a vacuum retard wtf are you on about

[Anonymous No.10700724]

>>10700716
What happens when the rocket is filled with the same pressure as space? You need a pressure difference and all "space" is is a gradiated pressure zone depending how close you are to the sun. You can call it a "vacuum" all you like that doesn't make it absent of shit.

>>10700703
see
>>10700405
and don't let images make you cry on an image board, you paranoid weenie.

[Anonymous No.10700769]

>>10700724
you said "these all work because we circle an electric transformer", I assume you're talking about the earth's core? or the sun? I'm saying rockets, and also steam engines, would still work on a spaceship outside the solar system, what does that have to do with pressure gradients?

[Anonymous No.10700869]

>>10700769
>what does that have to do with pressure gradients?

If there is no pressure to use (I.e potential) then where does the rocket go? The only reason a rocket actually "flys" is because it DISPLACES the weight of the fuel faster than the planet can pull it back down. It, and things like engines create their own pressure gradients apart from the atmosphere to displace in order to overcome inertia.
In other words without the means of change there is no change, you just have inertia. Makes sense right? Also yes, the core of the earth and sun are a transformer, both of which indeed have pressure gradients as you reach the center of them. Without these gradients then all it is is an inert chunk of rock.

[Anonymous No.10700884]

>>10700577
Which part of the solar wind interacting with a magnetic field is considered confirmation of the theory?

[Anonymous No.10700885]

>>10700706
I think it is supposed to be a baboon arse.

[Anonymous No.10700895]

>>10700869
On an entirely different subject, I'd like to recommend this (pic related) book.

[Anonymous No.10701005]

>>10700706
3D

[Anonymous No.10701009]

>>10700869
I'm not really sure what point you're making, do you mean that in outer space the rocket would no longer be accomplishing anything noteworthy since it isn't moving near the earth or sun? remember that the argument is over your original point: that there is no "scientific instrument / piece of technology" that does not use electricity
I just read the rest of the thread though and saw that you claimed that electromagnetic interaction between molecules in normal force is a form of electricity, so I assume we come to a standstill there